It's a fact and it's easy to find. It was a national news story on multiple networks and on multiple newspaper websites. If your so smart go find it. All your name calling clearly shows you're incapable of an intelligent debate.

Click to expand...

Doesn't take too long to find one version of the story. There are plenty of quotes in there that can be used by both sides of the argument. In particular, I think we should focus on the methodology:

They rely on Labor Department assessments of the level of education required to do the job in 900-plus U.S. occupations, which were used to calculate the shares of young adults with bachelor's degrees who were "underemployed."

Click to expand...

So, if you major in something with no idea what you could possibly do with a bachelor's degree in that field (e.g. art history was mentioned in the story), then you are highly likely to end up in a job (if you get one at all) that is classified by the Labor Department as not requiring a college education. No surprise there, as I would guess that ZERO of the 900+ job classifications that the Labor Department tracks require a degree in art history, so the art history B.A. holder will need to snag a job that DOES require a college degree but has nothing to do with art history, else be classified as underemployed! I can tell someone who is about to graduate high school that, regardless of the economy in 4.5 years, it will continue to be true that if they major in art history, they will be highly unlikely to snag a job in accounting, finance, computer science, engineering, basic sciences, nursing, or even teaching, because graduates with degrees in exactly those fields will be competing with them for the jobs. Duh.

So, "go to college and major in any old subject" is obviously not a ticket to riches, but that does not tell us much about someone who is supposedly a top-notch student with lots of A.P. courses who could choose several different majors, paying attention to the career prospects for each major.

And if the father of that student wants to say that going to college is not working out for lots of kids, then we also need to see the statistics in this economy for the kids who do not go to college, right?

debate doesn't work like that - one side is not responsible for coming up with evidence for the other side - especially when one side has been doing this just to prove the point that your actions don't match your tough words on evidence-based debate (i'm sure there are such articles out there - that isn't the point - but you don't use them to back up your posts, just as TCF didn't back up his original claim - and you grilled him for it)

i'll call it a day with my side of our childish debate on this board today (i didn't feel so bad keeping it going quite a while since there are some equally dumb arguments going on concurrently) - feel free to have the last word if you wish

So, if you major in something with no idea what you could possibly do with a bachelor's degree in that field (e.g. art history was mentioned in the story), then you are highly likely to end up in a job (if you get one at all) that is classified by the Labor Department as not requiring a college education. No surprise there, as I would guess that ZERO of the 900+ job classifications that the Labor Department tracks require a degree in art history, so the art history B.A. holder will need to snag a job that DOES require a college degree but has nothing to do with art history, else be classified as underemployed! I can tell someone who is about to graduate high school that, regardless of the economy in 4.5 years, it will continue to be true that if they major in art history, they will be highly unlikely to snag a job in accounting, finance, computer science, engineering, basic sciences, nursing, or even teaching, because graduates with degrees in exactly those fields will be competing with them for the jobs. Duh.

...

And if the father of that student wants to say that going to college is not working out for lots of kids, then we also need to see the statistics in this economy for the kids who do not go to college, right?

Click to expand...

well said on both points
1) definitely some major flaws with the analysis
and yeah
2) drives me crazy when people try to rag on the value of a college degree without using the obvious comparison group of the ones that didn't get that degree

Doesn't take too long to find one version of the story. There are plenty of quotes in there that can be used by both sides of the argument. In particular, I think we should focus on the methodology:

So, if you major in something with no idea what you could possibly do with a bachelor's degree in that field (e.g. art history was mentioned in the story), then you are highly likely to end up in a job (if you get one at all) that is classified by the Labor Department as not requiring a college education. No surprise there, as I would guess that ZERO of the 900+ job classifications that the Labor Department tracks require a degree in art history, so the art history B.A. holder will need to snag a job that DOES require a college degree but has nothing to do with art history, else be classified as underemployed! I can tell someone who is about to graduate high school that, regardless of the economy in 4.5 years, it will continue to be true that if they major in art history, they will be highly unlikely to snag a job in accounting, finance, computer science, engineering, basic sciences, nursing, or even teaching, because graduates with degrees in exactly those fields will be competing with them for the jobs. Duh.

So, "go to college and major in any old subject" is obviously not a ticket to riches, but that does not tell us much about someone who is supposedly a top-notch student with lots of A.P. courses who could choose several different majors, paying attention to the career prospects for each major.

And if the father of that student wants to say that going to college is not working out for lots of kids, then we also need to see the statistics in this economy for the kids who do not go to college, right?

Click to expand...

Good article. Lots of valuable info for young folks:

His situation highlights a widening but little-discussed labor problem.
Perhaps more than ever, the choices that young adults make earlier in life —
level of schooling, academic field and training, where to attend college, how to pay for it —
are having long-lasting financial impact.

His situation highlights a widening but little-discussed labor problem.
Perhaps more than ever, the choices that young adults make earlier in life —
level of schooling, academic field and training, where to attend college, how to pay for it —
are having long-lasting financial impact.

Click to expand...

Yes, it is well-known that some majors really require that you either (1) go to grad school, because the B.A./B.S. alone is not usually enough, or (2) get into an entirely different field. If you choose #2 and know it in advance, and just want the education for non-vocational reasons, great. If you graduate with a B.A. in History and find that the history teachers at the local schools have master's degrees, and you are surprised by this (see #1), then you did not do your homework.

Perhaps more than ever, the choices that young adults make earlier in life —
level of schooling, academic field and training, where to attend college, how to pay for it —
are having long-lasting financial impact.

Click to expand...

yup, what you quoted is true and sad

to build up competitive resumes for a lot of fields, have to make those decisions earlier and earlier nowadays

almost every college president gives some version of the "this is your playground, dabble around for a few years and figure out your passions" speech to the incoming freshman class - and increasingly they must be realizing that the truth really is "hopefully you guys already know what you're interested in and are piling up the related accomplishments - keep doing so the next few years, or else you're already behind in this competitive job market"

Spent about an hour talking tennis with an Ivy League coach. He said, "If a kid was home schooled I have ZERO shot of getting him in." I said there were 2 or 3 homes schooled now at Ivies. He said only because they had perfect SAT scores. If you are home schooled have to get perfect SAT to go Ivy. I think NESCAC has no home schooled men players. Bottom line: If you're thinking elite school think twice about home schooling.

Spent about an hour talking tennis with an Ivy League coach. He said, "If a kid was home schooled I have ZERO shot of getting him in." I said there were 2 or 3 homes schooled now at Ivies. He said only because they had perfect SAT scores. If you are home schooled have to get perfect SAT to go Ivy. I think NESCAC has no home schooled men players. Bottom line: If you're thinking elite school think twice about home schooling.

Click to expand...

This is not true.

While it is tougher compared to a standard school, it is definitely not impossible. The better you are the more pull the coach has. Does a 2 star who is homeschooled going to need a perfect score? Probably. Does a Blue Chip? Not a chance.

While it is tougher compared to a standard school, it is definitely not impossible. The better you are the more pull the coach has. Does a 2 star who is homeschooled going to need a perfect score? Probably. Does a Blue Chip? Not a chance.

Click to expand...

A lot of blue chips did not get into the IVYs who wanted to go. It is not a secret........

And the 800 on the SATs has to be coupled with a curriculum that was very challenging, Physics, Calculus, 4 years of language, a number of AP classes with the 5 on the exam, SAT 2, etc.....

However, the foreigner who is ten steps ahead of the Blue Chip, that young man they will make allowances for. Even the English language.

Stineman, for example, turned down several Ivy schools who wanted him. I'm sorry but the competition just isn't the same. Not everybody wants to go Ivy. There are a couple who have already turned them down this year.

Wrong information again....this time about 2-3 SAT Subject tests being required, and a separate Subject Test requirement for home schoolers

I would encourage anyone who has the urge to post college application requirements to post them correctly or resist the urge to post.

Below is the link to Harvard's application FAQs. Similar links for other colleges are readily accessible. In particular,

Which SAT Subject Tests should students take?

To satisfy our application requirements, applicants must take two SAT Subject Tests. Students should not submit two Subject Tests in mathematics to meet this requirement. Candidates whose first language is not English should ordinarily not use a Subject Test in their first language to meet the two Subject Tests requirement. . Applicants may wish to convey the breadth of their academic interests by taking tests in different subjects. All students are encouraged to submit additional Subject Tests (which may include one in a student’s first language), Advanced Placement or International Baccalaureate test results, or any other evidence of the breadth and depth of their academic accomplishments.

What any of this has to do with Brad Baughman is a mystery to me. But bad info in any junior thread does a disservice to juniors and needs to be called out I think

Click to expand...

Nothing to do with Brad.... And the thread should be about the junior, I would think.....

Just random postings at this point.

in general, colleges like a very large applicant pool.
It has nothing to do with their love for wading through endless resumes of prospective college students for the perfect match.

A college can get a very large applicant pool by posting a range of SAT scores that kids can rely on as indicators that they have a chance..
The infamous 25th to 75th percentile range.
Then, the student whose is at the 50% thinks they have a reasonable shot to get in.
The large applicant pool, and subsequent rejections equal a better number for the ranking game.

While, the lower range is set aside sometimes for select athletes, deep pocket donors, etc,
it does not happen very often.

Stineman, for example, turned down several Ivy schools who wanted him. I'm sorry but the competition just isn't the same. Not everybody wants to go Ivy. There are a couple who have already turned them down this year.

Click to expand...

Well, in all fairness to the athletes, the IVYs offer very few services/concessions to them.

in general, colleges like a very large applicant pool.
It has nothing to do with their love for wading through endless resumes of prospective college students for the perfect match.

A college can get a very large applicant pool by posting a range of SAT scores that kids can rely on as indicators that they have a chance..
The infamous 25th to 75th percentile range.
Then, the student whose is at the 50% thinks they have a reasonable shot to get in.
The large applicant pool, and subsequent rejections equal a better number for the ranking game.

While, the lower range is set aside sometimes for select athletes, deep pocket donors, etc,
it does not happen very often.

My daughter is at an Ivy, so I did do some research on this.

Click to expand...

The posted ranges are the ranges of applicants who were actually admitted. If you are at the 50% point, then you do have a pretty good chance of being admitted. I don't think that 50% of accepted applicants are athletes, children of big donors, etc. So, at the 50% point, you have better scores than many applicants who get accepted and are in no special category.

Nothing to do with Brad.... And the thread should be about the junior, I would think.....

Just random postings at this point.

in general, colleges like a very large applicant pool.
It has nothing to do with their love for wading through endless resumes of prospective college students for the perfect match.

A college can get a very large applicant pool by posting a range of SAT scores that kids can rely on as indicators that they have a chance..
The infamous 25th to 75th percentile range.
Then, the student whose is at the 50% thinks they have a reasonable shot to get in.
The large applicant pool, and subsequent rejections equal a better number for the ranking game.

While, the lower range is set aside sometimes for select athletes, deep pocket donors, etc,
it does not happen very often.

My daughter is at an Ivy, so I did do some research on this.

Click to expand...

Juniors, you can take a look at these charts if you wish to get a more factual....rather than anecdotal.....grasp of the situation.

Just got off the phone with obama he said this thread is going the wrong direction and is afraid his grades will get called into the arguing and all the applications he filled out for foreign students so he asked me to ask you guys to bring it back to Brad !!

Just got off the phone with obama he said this thread is going the wrong direction and is afraid his grades will get called into the arguing and all the applications he filled out for foreign students so he asked me to ask you guys to bring it back to Brad !!

Just got off the phone with obama he said this thread is going the wrong direction and is afraid his grades will get called into the arguing and all the applications he filled out for foreign students so he asked me to ask you guys to bring it back to Brad !!

Honestly I am yawning its getting boring guys .

Click to expand...

Sorry, Brad! We are way, way off topic.
And I am one who likes a pure thread.

Wrong information again....this time about 2-3 SAT Subject tests being required, and a separate Subject Test requirement for home schoolers

I would encourage anyone who has the urge to post college application requirements to post them correctly or resist the urge to post.

Below is the link to Harvard's application FAQs. Similar links for other colleges are readily accessible. In particular,

Which SAT Subject Tests should students take?

To satisfy our application requirements, applicants must take two SAT Subject Tests. Students should not submit two Subject Tests in mathematics to meet this requirement. Candidates whose first language is not English should ordinarily not use a Subject Test in their first language to meet the two Subject Tests requirement. . Applicants may wish to convey the breadth of their academic interests by taking tests in different subjects. All students are encouraged to submit additional Subject Tests (which may include one in a student’s first language), Advanced Placement or International Baccalaureate test results, or any other evidence of the breadth and depth of their academic accomplishments.

It is well known that applicants who were home-schooled are encouraged or required to submit more subject tests than regular applicants.

Most, if not all, Ivys require 2 subject tests from all applicants and certainly encourage more for applicants who were home-schooled.

Excuse me for misstating "2-3" subject tests.

The requirement was recently lowered to only 2 subject tests, so congrats, you got me there.

Here in the info from Yale's website:

Home-schooled applicants complete the same application as other students and must fulfill the same testing requirements. Because home-schooled students may lack standard measures of academic performance, they must try to provide comparable information in different ways. Here are a few suggestions for home-schoolers as they approach the application process:

Standardized test scores hold relatively more weight for home-schooled applicants. If you are a home-schooler and you feel confident about your ability to do well on the exams, we advise you to demonstrate your abilities in various areas by taking more than the required two SAT Subject Tests.

Click to expand...

Finally, I would encourage you, Mister Bill, to be accurate in what you post rather than being so overly eager to always correct others.

So now you are dropping your claim about home-schooled applicants NOT BEING encouraged to take additional subject tests?

Click to expand...

Where did I say that?

I thought I was talking about requirements. Please put an end to this silly discussion by just posting up where I said what you said I said and I will say sorry........otherwise I'm standing by everything I've said

I thought I was talking about requirements. Please put an end to this silly discussion by just posting up where I said what you said I said and I will say sorry........otherwise I'm standing by everything I've said

Click to expand...

We've heard this "post up" thing from you before.

I guess people are always misquoting you and misunderstanding what you are saying.

By the way, when talking about college admissions, there is a very fine line between a requirement versus an "encouraged to"

I wonder how many students are admitted when they do not meet criteria that students are "encouraged to" meet.

NY requires a diploma or equivalent. Some private colleges demand extra SAT II exams from homeschoolers. When my son was applying for college with an intended major theater or film, Yale and Carnegie Mellon wanted three SAT IIs from him as a homeschooler, while NYU wanted only the regular SAT and no more. I think if he had been applying to NYU for math or business or science, he might have needed those extra SAT IIs.

Soianka's post below:
Definitely SAT II subject tests would be very important for HS'd kids. Every applicant has to take 2-3 SAT II's but I think the requirement for HS'd youngsters is more subject tests, if I recall correctly.

MisterBill's post -
Wrong information again....this time about 2-3 SAT Subject tests being required, and a separate Subject Test requirement for home schoolers

1) Well, it might not be a "requirement" for homeschoolers, in that if you didn't take 4 subject tests,
we won't take your application.
But, it is heavily advised that homeschoolers take more subject tests than the applicant from high school.
I think that is a well known fact.

Per "Ask the Dean" -
Once it’s time to actually apply, homeschooled students should:
Take as many SAT Subject Tests or AP exams as possible to provide objective information about what you’ve learned

2) MisterBill, I did enjoy your posts when you first came on. But, you are so argumentative and looking for a fight half the time.
Look at your language used in addressing Soianka, "Wrong information again".

3) In regards to your sexuality, you jumped to that conclusion.

4) In fairness to Brad, he wants to focus on DB.
So, I do hope we can get back to TT's main focus.

Definitely SAT II subject tests would be very important for HS'd kids. Every applicant has to take 2-3 SAT II's but I think the requirement for HS'd youngsters is more subject tests, if I recall correctly.

Click to expand...

MisterBill's post -
Wrong information again....this time about 2-3 SAT Subject tests being required, and a separate Subject Test requirement for home schoolers

Click to expand...

Well, it might not be a "requirement" for homeschoolers, in that if you didn't take 4 subject tests, we won't take your application.

But, it is heavily advised that homeschoolers take more subject tests than the applicant from high school. I think that is a well known fact.

2) MisterBill, I did enjoy your posts when you first came on. But, you are so argumentative and looking for a fight half the time. Look at your language used in addressing Soianka, "Wrong information again".

3) In regards to your sexuality, you jumped to that conclusion.

4) In fairness to Brad, he wants to focus on DB.
So, I do hope we can get back to TT's main focus.

Click to expand...

Thank you!!!

We could have had a civil conversation if he simply said, "I would like to clarify what Soianka wrote" or asked me for clarification.

I'll post no more on the subject so we can post about Deiton and Brad on this thread.

I could visit each ivies website to see which one uses the word "encouraged" versus "required" but that would be a profound waste of time.

Click to expand...

Not nearly as profound a waste of time as arguing with Mr. Bill It's like nailing jelly to a wall.

Anyway, anybody smart enough to potentially get admitted to a Ivy League School is probably smart enough to know that they should contact the universities for specific requirements, and should not be relying on the Brad Baughman thread of TT for this information. If they are, they are probably not Ivy League material, irregadless whether they are taking 2 or 3 subject tests

Tcf the boy holds a pretty nice GPA 3.8 and this is 4 or 5 AP classes and some other nonsense he has to do but I hate to break it to you , he can do what he wants and he is leaning towards what you think is impossible , I would back him which ever way he chooses .

Think about this and formally uneducated man has a child playing a high level of tennis nationally and has pretty much the choice of any school he wants at 16 oh wait 16.5 ,,having done that you don't think. I can calculate wheather the tour is possible ?

Click to expand...

For what I see DB is preparing for the Ivy. So this thread is finally on the right track.

Will stay out of the bickering, but there is so much misinformation on here about subject tests and other particulars. Also, not everyone has or needs a perfect SAT, this is the most erroneous legend going and is freaking kids out. And what applies to a blue chip is different than a 2 star, etc. Go to each college website and find out what they want, call admissions officers, talk to coaches. Don't rely on any of this info.

Click to expand...

Correct. Thanks for the concise summary. There is a lot of wrong information being put out here, again and again.

I guess people are always misquoting you and misunderstanding what you are saying.

Funny that.

Click to expand...

People are always misunderstanding what a lot of other people say and write, because we are afflicted by fuzzy thinking and most of us are skimming along instead of reading. I think the internet, TV, etc., are making all of us a little bit ADD. I find myself skimming through things way too much. I did not used to do that. Maybe it is the sheer volume of stuff online that we want to read that encourages bad habits.

Here is what happened. Ivy coach and I were watching a match. One of the kids playing, a fabulous player, is home schooled. I know the kid well and told the coach, half in jest, I can get you that kid. Coach said, " I cannot get a kid in who is home schooled". I questioned him saying there are a couple home schoolers playing tennis at Ivies. He said, " only because those kids have perfect SAT scores." Nothing more to discuss. He said it. I believe him. He coaches one of top Ivies. Maybe lower Ivies different.

I am sorry that I had that one wrong. I had mistakenly thought I had seen doubles points charts on Futures draw sheets that included the quarterfinal rounds. It makes zero sense that winning earns nothing (what's the rationale? Doubles is easy? First round losers are all chumps, so who cares if you beat them?) Nevertheless, it can be confirmed from the doubles ranking breakdowns of players who play a lot of Futures. For example, I looked up Reid Carleton on the ATP web site. He won in the round of 16, lost in the quarterfinals, in two consecutive weeks in August of 2012 in Canadian Futures tourneys, and got zero points both times. My mistake.

Seriously, if anyone knows a rationale, I would love to hear it. FYI: Carleton won prize money (chump change) in the two Futures that earned zero points.

Click to expand...

It used to be that way. It got changed in 2004ish. I know guys that got pts by winning 1st rd Futures dubs.

and novikov seems to be showing that his us open form was an exception

Click to expand...

Sarcasm? Novikov makes the finals of doubles and his first round win was over the #651 ranked player. That player he beat has wins over Halebian and the #186 player in the last calendar year. Less than a month from his US Open and his form is now judged an exception. Harsh.

Sarcasm? Novikov makes the finals of doubles and his first round win was over the #651 ranked player. That player he beat has wins over Halebian and the #186 player in the last calendar year. Less than a month from his US Open and his form is now judged an exception. Harsh.

Click to expand...

get a life, dude...are you just going to argue with anything i post nowadays to see if you can find one argument where you don't look like an idiot? keep trying

no...not sarcasm...he took down a top 90 player in the world relatively comfortably in us open, and held his own quite well with benneteau after that...since then three futures tournaments where he hasn't gotten past rd of 16 and has lost to jason jung (#609) in straights, xavier smith (unranked) in straights, and daniel nguyen (#1003) in straights

i don't follow futures doubles results, but that final is nice i suppose

edit - corrected some rankings, smith tricked me with his dubs ranking that pops up first on the atp site, no singles ranking yet

get a life, dude...are you just going to argue with anything i post nowadays to see if you can find one argument where you don't look like an idiot? keep trying

no...not sarcasm...he took down a top 90 player in the world relatively comfortably in us open, and held his own quite well with benneteau after that...since then three futures tournaments where he hasn't gotten past rd of 16 and has lost to jason jung (#623) in straights, xavier smith (#1380) in straights, and daniel nguyen (#1003) in straights

i don't follow futures doubles results, but that final is nice i suppose